MT LeConte
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Messages
- 3,062
- Likes
- 5,803
I am a liberal, but as Carlos pointed out, the whole uranium / $100 million story was an intentional lie by the far right that was repeated so many times on right wing sites and by Trump himself that you and many others believe it to be true.
This is the exact kind of information that caused so many to conclude "I don't like Trump, but I can't vote for Hillary."
Disinformation and fake news (which Russia participated in) was the difference maker in the election. I realize that a lot of you disagree with that assessment and that's to be expected.
In not a liberal but I know Clinton didn't sell Russia the uranium. The Committee on Foreign Investment did. Clinton was just a member of that committee. The committee is made of nine cabinet members and department heads. And Clinton didn't vote to authorize the transaction Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez did. Also the uranium was never exported to Russia. The committee only approved the transfer of the uranium mining company Uranium One which was a Canadian company to Atomoredzoloto the Russian company
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
But a review of tax records in Canada, where Mr. Telfer has a family charity called the Fernwood Foundation, shows that he donated millions of dollars more, during and after the critical time when the foreign investment committee was reviewing his deal with the Russians. With the Russians offering a special dividend, shareholders like Mr. Telfer stood to profit.
His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.
The Clinton campaign left it to the foundation to reply to questions about the Fernwood donations; the foundation did not provide a response.
Mr. Telfer’s undisclosed donations came in addition to between $1.3 million and $5.6 million in contributions, which were reported, from a constellation of people with ties to Uranium One or UrAsia, the company that originally acquired Uranium One’s most valuable asset: the Kazakh mines. Without those assets, the Russians would have had no interest in the deal: “It wasn’t the goal to buy the Wyoming mines. The goal was to acquire the Kazakh assets, which are very good,” Mr. Novikov, the Rosatom spokesman, said in an interview.
Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One.
Mueller has assembled some of the most high powered and experienced team of investigators and prosecutors ever assembled but because some are Democrats this is all "fake news"??? Mueller didn't hire a prosecutor who specializes in campaign finance and another prosecutor who specializes in money laundering and Eastern European organized crime cases for no reason.
You are both omitting important information of personal connections and money flow between beneficiaries of the deal and the Clinton Foundation. Also, the CF failed to disclose these particular donations.
It's been uncovered by multiple journalists.
Also, it's a bit of a straw man to say Hillary selling uranium is fake news since the story isn't that she sold it (of course it's not hers to sell).
There is at least as much evidence here or more of funny business in the deal than there is the collusion story you both seem to buy into.
How about some consistency?
Yep, this team isn't inept, unlike the folks they are investigating.
Robert Mueller Chooses His Investigatory Dream Team
so word is out he's investigating possible obstruction of justice for the Comey firing.
Any issue that the SP is big buddies with the guy who was fired? If he's a straight shooter he should recuse himself from the obstruction portion of the larger investigation.
Mueller has assembled some of the most high powered and experienced team of investigators and prosecutors ever assembled but because some are Democrats this is all "fake news"??? Mueller didn't hire a prosecutor who specializes in campaign finance and another prosecutor who specializes in money laundering and Eastern European organized crime cases for no reason.
What does this mean?